The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 4 26B-A4B

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 29.6. Gemma 4 26B-A4B is 101.3x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 29.6, ranking #1 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Fable 5.1 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Gemma 4 26B-A4B is roughly 101.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Fable 5.1 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Fable 5.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 56.9 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Gemma 4 26B-A4B

  • cost matters — it's about 101.3x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.9
#1
29.6
#115
Reasoning
54.6
#4
29.5
#110
Agents
42.3
#2
12.7
#91
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.13 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
1,000,000
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Vision
40.8#1
14.2#88
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 12 for Gemma 4 26B-A4B

1 shared

Claude Fable 5.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam), while Gemma 4 26B-A4B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Gemma 4 26B-A4B costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 76.9x more expensive than Gemma 4 26B-A4B ($0.13/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 125.0x more expensive than Gemma 4 26B-A4B ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than Gemma 4 26B-A4B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
Google
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Input tokens$0.13
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Fable 5.1 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Gemma 4 26B-A4B's 262,144 tokens. Gemma 4 26B-A4B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Google
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 26B-A4B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Fable 5.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 4 26B-A4B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Gemma 4 26B-A4B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemma 4 26B-A4B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Gemma 4 26B-A4B was released on 2026-04-02.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 5 months newer than Gemma 4 26B-A4B.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 days ago

5mo newer
Gemma 4 26B-A4B

Apr 2, 2026

5 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 4 26B-A4B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, while Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 4 26B-A4B's training data extends to 2025-01-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date.

Claude Fable 5.1

—

Gemma 4 26B-A4B

Jan 2025

Provider Availability

Claude Fable 5.1 is available from Anthropic. Gemma 4 26B-A4B is available from Novita.

Claude Fable 5.1

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $10.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $50.00/1M

Gemma 4 26B-A4B

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.13/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 26B-A4B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 4 26B-A4B.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemma 4 26B-A4B?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 29.6. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Gemma 4 26B-A4B is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Fable 5.1 compare to Gemma 4 26B-A4B in benchmarks?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores OSWorld 2.0: 77.9%, CursorBench v3.2: 73.4%, Humanity's Last Exam: 65.0%, GDPval-AA: 61.8%, Terminal-Bench 4.0: 55.8%. Gemma 4 26B-A4B scores AIME 2026: 88.3%, MMMLU: 86.3%, t2-bench: 85.5%, MMLU-Pro: 82.6%, MathVision: 82.4%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Gemma 4 26B-A4B?

Gemma 4 26B-A4B is 76.9x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. Gemma 4 26B-A4B costs $0.13/M input and $0.40/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 26B-A4B?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Gemma 4 26B-A4B supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 26B-A4B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.9 vs 29.6), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.13/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 26B-A4B?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Gemma 4 26B-A4B is developed by Google.

Related comparisons